Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, it is my great and distinct privilege to honor one of my dearest friends, the incomparable Sylvia Lask, as she celebrated her 85th birthday this year on February 25th.

Born in 1934 to Vera Lask and Max Lask, Sylvia was one of three children in the family, which included her brothers Ronald and Robert. She grew up in Detroit, Michigan and later moved to New York City, where she became certified as a dietician. Sylvia and I first met when we were both living in Co-op City. I had knocked on her door while gathering petition signatures, and she began asking me all kinds of questions pertinent to both our community and the political world. After we had a long chat, I asked if she was a member of the local political club, and suggested she join us at the next meeting. She did, and we became fast friends.

Sylvia and I were both heavily involved in the club's work from there on out. She went on to serve as Democratic State Committee Person, was also a delegate at two democratic conventions, for Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton.

Sylvia is a fierce advocate for her community and always a strong voice on the issue of mental health. Her lobbying trips to Albany have become the stuff of legend. Among other things, her efforts led to the passage of the Mental Health in Education Act, which requires Mental Health to be taught in all public schools in New York State. Even at 85, Sylvia still makes those weekly trips to Albany and continues her advocacy work on behalf of the Mental Health Association in New York State (MHANYS).

When not saving the world, Sylvia enjoys listening to folk music-- specifically The Weavers, Pete Seeger and Peter Paul and Mary--and taking long strolls. Her spirit is indomitable; she never sits down, never spends too much time celebrating a victory, and is always planning the next steps needed to advance patient rights. Sylvia's drive has always been fueled in large part by her family and friends. She was married to Sam Hershkowitz and has two beautiful children, Vicki and Marc, and one grandchild, Ron. They are the light in Sylvia's life.

Madam Speaker, I count myself fortunate every day to know Sylvia Lask, and I'm not alone in feeling that way about such a special individual. Her list of friends, from elected officials to community activists and everyone in between, is too long to list. She has done incredible work to help the people of New York over many decades, and her contributions cannot be overstated.

Sylvia is like a family member to me and my entire family. I am so honored to recognize her achievements, and I am so thankful to have her in my life.

Madam Speaker, I rise to honor two pillars of the Scarsdale community, Rise and Marc Robbins, who this year are being recognized as the Keter Shem Tov Honorees at this year's Young Israel of Scarsdale Anniversary Dinner.

Rise and Marc have been members of the Young Israel of Scarsdale community, together, for nearly 30 years. Rise grew up in New Rochelle and moved to Scarsdale in 1973, when she joined the YIS. She graduated NYU and then attended Touro college where she graduated the Physician Assistant Program.

Marc grew up in New Rochelle and graduated Columbia University. He is the president of IM Robbins P.C. an engineering company in New York City.

The two met at the Scarsdale volunteer Ambulance Corp, where they were both EMT volunteers for over 20 years. They have been active on committees in their children schools and the shul. The YIS plays a very important part of their lives. It is a warm and welcoming community and they feel very lucky to be a part of it.

Together Rise and Marc have raised four children, Jennifer, married to Yakov, Daniel, Amy and Michael and have three grandchildren. Avishai, Shira and Moshe.

Madam Speaker, Rise and Marc have together done tremendous work to strengthen the Scarsdale community, both inside and outside of the YIS. They are most deserving of this wonderful recognition, and I want to congratulate them on this special occasion.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 156) calling for accountability and justice for the assassination of Boris Nemtsov, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 156, as amended, a resolution calling for accountability and justice for the assassination of Boris Nemtsov, currently under consideration.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution. I am proud to have authored this measure with the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul), my colleague and the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Committee. The measure before us today condemns the assassination of Boris Nemtsov.

Nemtsov was a brave advocate for democracy in Russia, calling for free elections and an end to the massive corruption at the Kremlin. I remember when he visited here and I had him in my office. We took pictures. Just the other day, we were looking at them.

He certainly was a champion of freedom in Russia and, for it, met his demise. The fact that he was calling for free elections and an end to the massive corruption in the Kremlin put him right in Vladimir Putin's crosshairs.

Now, he joins a long list of brave journalists, human rights activists, and political opponents murdered by Putin's henchmen in their quest to silence all criticism of the Kremlin and stamp out any perceived threat to Putin's authoritarian regime.

When I met Boris Nemtsov here in Washington in my office, he talked about his vision for Russia, free from Putin's grip on power, with open, fair elections, independent media, and a strong civil society. In the words of John McCain, Boris Nemtsov ``would not be oppressed by unjust laws or violence or by violence and fear . . . he lived for love and justice and truth.''

He was incredibly brave to take on these issues in a country where opposition to Putin often amounts to a death sentence. Just a few months after our

conversation, as I mentioned before, he was murdered in cold blood in Moscow.

Now, it has been 4 years since his death, but there has been no proper investigation of his assassination and the coverup and zero accountability for those responsible. That is certainly an outrage.

This resolution condemns the Kremlin's systematic targeting of its political opponents and calls on the administration to impose sanctions on those responsible for Nemtsov's murder and coverup.

It also requires the administration to deliver to Congress a thorough report on Nemtsov's assassination. That is a critical part of this legislation because, sadly, the administration, in my opinion, hasn't done nearly enough to stand up to Russia and call out Putin's thuggery.

So it is up to Congress to assert American leadership on this issue. I strongly support this bipartisan, bicameral measure, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Committee on Ways and Means,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, March 11, 2019.

Hon. Eliot L. Engel,

Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Engel: I am writing with respect to H. Res.

156, ``Calling for Accountability and Justice for the

Assassination of Boris Nemtsov.'' As a result of your having

consulted with us on provisions on which the Committee on

Ways and Means has a jurisdictional interest, I will not

request a sequential referral on this measure.

The Committee on Ways and Means takes this action with the

mutual understanding that we do not waive any jurisdiction

over the subject matter contained in this or similar

legislation, and the Committee will be appropriately

consulted and involved as the bill or similar legislation

moves forward so that we may address any remaining issues

within our jurisdiction. The Committee also reserves the

right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of

conferees to any House-Senate conference involving this or

similar legislation, and request your support for such a

request.

Finally, I would appreciate your response to this letter

confirming this understanding, and would ask that a copy of

our exchange of letters on this matter be included in the

Congressional Record during floor consideration of H. Res.

156.

Sincerely,

Richard E. Neal,

Chairman.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Malinowski), who is a very new and valued member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, in closing, let me say, it is critical that we speak out against strong men and dictators throughout the world. We need to demand justice for those unable to do so themselves.

As we have mentioned, Boris Nemtsov was brutally murdered for bravely standing up to Putin and his corrupt regime. The Kremlin is being complicit in covering up the assassination and failing to conduct a proper investigation.

By passing this measure, we show Putin, his cronies, and dictators throughout the world that the U.S. Congress is watching, and we will not stay silent.

Madam Speaker, I strongly support this resolution. I urge my colleagues to join me, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 596) to prohibit United States Government recognition of Russia's annexation of Crimea, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 596, the Crimea Annexation Non- recognition Act, as amended, currently under consideration.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I thank this bill's author, who is a valuable member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Mr. Connolly from Virginia.

Madam Speaker, I also thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul), our ranking member, for working with us on this bipartisan legislation.

Madam Speaker, Vladimir Putin has left no doubt about his intentions to expand Russian influence, undermine democracy, and splinter the alliances and agreements that have long kept Russia in check.

We have seen these through Russia's direct attacks on our democratic institutions, including our own--remember the Presidential election of 2016--through a pernicious and widespread misinformation campaign designed to distort reality and foment confusion and, in no clearer way, through its illegal occupation of parts of Ukraine and parts of Georgia.

It is shocking in the 21st century to see a country trample on a neighbor's sovereignty and seize territory by force. It goes against everything we have worked for since World War II to build a Europe that is whole, free, and in peace.

It has been 5 years since Russian forces moved into Crimea and staged a sham election in an attempt to give their occupation a gloss of legitimacy, but there is nothing legitimate about it--absolutely nothing.

The United States must never accept Putin's attempts to seize territory by force, and this legislation would enshrine into our laws a nonrecognition of Russia's annexation of Crimea. This bill would prevent our government from taking any action that even implies American recognition of this blatantly illegal land grab.

This bill also sends a strong message to our Ukrainian friends that we stand shoulder to shoulder with them as they continue to resist Russian efforts to fracture their country. This is especially important in light of recent events in which the Russian Navy intercepted Ukrainian patrol boats in Ukrainian waters, capturing the vessels and their crew by force.

Vladimir Putin is a bully and a thug. His troops may hold Crimea in a stranglehold, but we need to be clear that Crimea will always be part of Ukraine, not part of Russia. This measure will put that rejection permanently into our laws. I am pleased to support it.

Madam Speaker, I ask all Members to do likewise, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly), the author of this bill and a very valued member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, in closing, let me say that we need to take a strong stand against Vladimir Putin and his aggressive behavior in Eastern Europe. This legislation would reaffirm in American law that Russia's annexation of Crimea is illegal and that the United States will never recognize its legitimacy.

I hope the other body will act on this measure soon after we pass it, and I hope the administration will signal its willingness to sign this legislation. There are too many questions swirling around when it comes to Russia, too many times that we don't seem to be calling Vladimir Putin out for what he has done. I think that it is something that we really need to look at very carefully, and I would hope the White House would do that.

Signing this bill will not put these concerns to rest, but it would help show that the United States won't just roll over and accept Russia's land grabs and egregious violations of international law.

I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly) for his work on this bill, and I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) for his work on the bill. I am happy to support it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to vote ``yes'' on this measure today, but I do have concerns about how we are dealing with these issues. Obviously, all forms of hatred and bigotry are intolerable and we should go on the record as saying so.

I am voting for this because when I read the resolution, I agreed with everything it says. But let me say this to the criticism that the Democratic majority won't condemn anti-Semitism. A few weeks back we took the virtually unprecedented step of accepting a Republican motion to recommit, the procedural tool the majority never supports because it condemned anti-Semitism. We were proud to set aside precedent to condemn anti-Semitism then, and in today's resolution, we are doing so again today.

So contrary to what some are saying, that is twice in the course of a month that the Democratic majority is condemning anti-Semitism on the floor of the House.

But I must say, the words spoken by our colleague from Minnesota last week touched a very real, very raw place for me. My desire for the House to go on record again, specifically condemning anti-Semitism, wasn't a desire to single the gentlewoman out or to stifle debate on U.S. policy towards Israel, but it was a desire and need to say that certain words, no matter who utters them, have no place in our public discourse and, indeed, can be very dangerous.

When a Member of our body speaks the way the Representative from Minnesota spoke, then we need to single it out and say we will not tolerate it. In the last week, these problems have been compounded.

Since the comments that sparked this controversy, the gentlewoman from Minnesota has become the target of vile, racist Islamophobic smears and threats. One begets another. And we have got to put a stop to it now. That is horrific. Islamophobia has no place in this body or anywhere in the United States, and anti-Semitism certainly doesn't either.

I wish we had had a separate resolution about anti-Semitism. I think we deserved it. I think it was wrong not to have it. I don't think we should mix everything. But I want to say very clearly and very loudly that anti-Semitism will never be tolerated by me, never be tolerated by this body, and no Member of Congress should be making anti-Semitic statements.

No Member of Congress should be saying hurtful things and then not apologizing for them. So I hope we can put everything together to support this resolution. It condemns all kinds of hatred, whether it is Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, any kind of hatred that is what we need to do. And any time that anti-Semitism rears its ugly head, we need to stop it.

This resolution is a fine resolution, and I will support it. But I am very disappointed that we weren't able to have a separate resolution to specifically condemn anti-Semitism and what our colleague said that really was a very hateful term.

I hope we can put everything together in this House. I know we can. I know people on both sides of the aisle want to work together. We want to stomp out any form of hatred, particularly anti-Semitism.

I will continue to work with anybody who wants to do that.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 501) to amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize and enhance the poison center national toll-free number, national media campaign, and grant program, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 501.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 501, the Poison Center Network Enhancement Act.

This bill, which I have coauthored with the gentlewoman from Indiana, Congresswoman Susan Brooks, reauthorizes for an additional 5 years the national network of poison control centers, known as PCCs, which play a critical role in the fight to end the opioid crisis.

Our country's 55 poison centers are staffed by trained toxicologists, pharmacists, physicians, and nurses who are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year to provide real-time lifesaving assistance via a national toll-free number, which is 1-800-222-1222. Some 330 million people are served by these critical centers, while handling 2.6 million cases.

In 2017, someone called a poison center roughly every 12 seconds in our country. More than 90 percent of those calls were due to poison exposure in someone's home, and more than half of all cases involved children under the age of 12. That is why speedy access to poison centers is such an invaluable resource, especially for parents.

Poison centers also save hundreds of millions in Federal dollars by helping to avoid the unnecessary use of medical services and shortening the length of time a person spends in the hospital, if hospitalization due to poisoning is necessary.

It is clear that these centers are a smart public health investment, but they are also an integral part of our response to the opioid epidemic.

Since 2011, poison centers handled nearly 200 cases per day involving opioid misuse. Data from poison centers helped to detect trends in the epidemic, and experts helped educate Americans about the crisis in ways that could potentially save the lives of their loved ones.

The Upstate New York Poison Center, for instance, used the New York State Fair to educate New Yorkers about proper use of naloxone, the overdose reversal drug. This bill would make sure that activities like this can continue.

Mr. Speaker, I had the privilege of coauthoring the last poison center reauthorization signed into law in 2014, and I am pleased to have worked on this important bill.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Brooks for partnering with me on this legislation, as well as Congresswoman DeGette and Congresswoman Herrera Beutler for being original cosponsors. Let me also thank Chairman Pallone and Ranking Member Walden for their assistance in bringing this bill to the floor today.

As I mentioned earlier, in Westchester County, New York, much of which I represent, 124 people died due to opioids in 2016. In the Bronx, part of which I also represent, more New Yorkers died of overdoses than in any other borough in New York City.

We must do more to end this epidemic, and I am pleased to see this legislation moving forward as part of that effort.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 525) to amend title XI of the Social Security Act to direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a public-private partnership for purposes of identifying health care waste, fraud, and abuse.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 525.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 525, the Strengthening the Health Care Fraud Prevention Task Force Act of 2019. This bipartisan bill would authorize the Healthcare Fraud Prevention Partnership, and improve and expand the task force's ability to fight waste, fraud, and abuse throughout our healthcare system.

The Healthcare Fraud Prevention Partnership is a public-private partnership between the Department of Health and Human Services, insurance companies, Federal and State law enforcement agencies, and State healthcare agencies. The partnership aims to improve the detection and prevention of healthcare fraud by facilitating the exchange of data and information between the public and private sectors on fraud trends and successful antifraud practices.

The legislation we are considering today would authorize the partnership, require the partnership to report regularly to Congress, and give the agency new tools to enhance and expand its capabilities.

We must continue to work on a bipartisan basis to enhance our fraud detection capabilities.

I support this legislation and I urge my colleagues to continue to work together to find meaningful solutions to root out fraud, waste, and abuse in our healthcare system.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

House of Representatives,

Committee on Ways and Means,

Washington, DC, February 25, 2019.

Hon. Frank Pallone,

Chairman, Energy and Commerce Committee,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Pallone: In recognition of the desire to

expedite consideration of H.R. 525, Strengthening the Health

Care Fraud Prevention Task Force Act of 2019, the Committee

on Ways and Means agrees to waive formal consideration of the

bill as to provisions that fall within the rule X

jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means.

The Committee on Ways and Means takes this action with the

mutual understanding that we do not waive any jurisdiction

over the subject matter contained in this or similar

legislation, and the Committee will be appropriately

consulted and involved as the bill or similar legislation

moves forward so that we may address any remaining issues

within our jurisdiction. The Committee also reserves the

right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of

conferees to any House-Senate conference involving this or

similar legislation.

Finally, I would appreciate your response to this letter

confirming this understanding, and would ask that a copy of

our exchange of letter on this matter be included in the

Congressional Record during floor consideration of H.R. 525.

Sincerely,

Richard E. Neal,

Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to work together to find meaningful solutions to root out waste, fraud, and abuse in our healthcare system, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material on H.J. Res. 37.

Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

This is an important moment for the House, Madam Chair. For years, under administrations of both parties, the Congress has handed away our authority and abrogated our responsibility when it comes to foreign policy, particularly the questions of how and where our military is engaged around the world.

Article I of the Constitution gives Congress the responsibility to declare war, yet we have given Presidents of both parties a virtual blank check to send our brave servicemembers into harm's way while we have stood on the sidelines.

With the measure we are considering today, we take some of that power back, and we do so to restore a sense of American values and American leadership to the worst humanitarian catastrophe in the world.

For the last few years, we have all seen horrific images of the civilian casualties in the Yemen war: starving children, millions displaced, outbreaks of deadly disease.

Madam Chair, 85,000 children have starved to death. Fourteen million are on the brink of famine. More than a million suffer from cholera. And the ongoing military operations are bringing us no closer to a resolution. The only way out of this mess is for parties to sit down and work toward a political solution.

The United States can and should play a role pushing for that solution, pushing parties to make a commitment to negotiations. This measure, introduced by Mr. Khanna, will help us do exactly that.

Let me explain why this is so important and why I support passing this resolution right now.

In the last few years, the Saudi-led coalition has carried out 18,000 airstrikes. A full one-third of those strikes hit nonmilitary targets. This is absolutely reckless.

I am not naive, Madam Chair. I know we have critical strategic interests in that region. The Houthis are a problem. They get support from Iran. They launch missiles into Saudi territory and international waterways, threatening Saudi civilians. They are starving the Yemeni people, diverting assistance, and holding civilians hostage to their political demands. But we cannot just give the coalition a blank check when so many innocent lives are being lost. And if the administration won't demand any sort of accountability from the Saudis and Emiratis, it is time for Congress to act.

I want to acknowledge my friend from Texas, the ranking member on the Foreign Affairs Committee, Mr. McCaul. I believe that he also wants to see Congress reclaim our prerogatives on foreign policy, though I understand we have an honest difference of opinion on the approach we are dealing with today.

I am glad that we moved this measure through regular order, that we had a hearing with experts and a markup, and that the gentleman from Texas and I could make our cases before the Rules Committee. It allowed me to hear the arguments from all perspectives on this issue.

I think, during this debate, we will hear my friends on the other side call this resolution misguided. I think because this resolution has to do with our security agreements with the Saudis and Emiratis, we will hear them question what impact this may have on other security agreements.

It is a fair question, to be honest. That is why this measure is tailored so specifically to deal with just this situation. This is not a broad, blanket policy that is going to tie the hands of the executive branch. There is no dangerous precedent being set here, just an attempt to stop a war that is costing far too many innocent lives.

I think we will hear my friends question whether this measure would even do anything because this measure withdraws American forces engaged in hostilities, and the Pentagon says ``hostilities'' only applies to situations where American troops are firing weapons at an enemy. I have two reactions to that.

First of all, this measure would specifically define ``hostilities'' to include aerial refueling of warplanes carrying out airstrikes against Houthi militants. Now, I understand the Defense

Department has stopped refueling as a matter of policy, but policies can be reversed, so this resolution would cut off refueling as a matter of law.

My second point is broader and gets at the heart of today's debate. This body is not subject to the definitions conjured up by the Defense Department. We don't ask permission to exercise our Article I authority. Of course, the Pentagon will try to define things in a way that consolidates the power of the executive branch, but Congress, with authority over war powers, need not accept that definition.

The Congress has lost its grip on foreign policy, in my opinion, by granting too much deference to the executive branch, by failing to examine the decisions, determinations, and definitions that are used to justify sending Americans into harm's way. Our job is to keep that branch in check, not to shrug our shoulders when they tell us to mind our own business.

Lastly, I think we will hear my colleagues on the other side ask: Isn't this just all politics? No, Madam Chair. Politics is what the former majority did to this resolution twice during the last Congress. Politics is stifling debate on national security issues because we are uncomfortable with the message it might send or we don't want to take a tough vote.

Politics is walking away from our constitutional responsibilities, as Congress has done for far too long; and frankly, we have done it for far too long, Congresses in both parties with a majority and Presidents in both parties.

Our Article I responsibilities are things that we cannot just simply turn the other way. We are a coequal branch of government, and we have not had a declaration of war, for instance, since 1941. We are content to just tell whatever administration is in, go ahead, you handle it. We don't have any responsibility. I hope that that stops this afternoon.

The other body has already weighed in on this measure. It passed with bipartisan support. Today, the Members of the House get our chance to go on record finally and say where we stand.

I joined this resolution as an original cosponsor because I think it will lead to a sort of reckoning for our government.

What is our role in the conflict in Yemen?

What is Congress' voice in our foreign policy?

How will we exercise American leadership and American power?

What will we provide and what will we withhold to push warring parties toward peace?

I want to thank Mr. Khanna for his hard work and for his leadership in shining the light on this issue.

I want to thank our members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee who have contributed so far to a valuable debate.

I want to thank Mr. McCaul, who has made his opposition to this about the policy, not about the politics or the personalities. We are going to have a lot more debates; sometimes we will be on the same side and sometimes not, but I hope we can always grapple with these challenges in a substantive way.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Khanna), the author of this joint resolution.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Bera), the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee's Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, a very valued member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), a new member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee who is already making his mark.

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), our majority leader.

(Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Ted Lieu), a very well-respected member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Espaillat), another very valuable member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Trone), another new member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Pocan), a champion of progressive causes.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly), another very valued member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch).

Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Today is the day that Congress begins to take back its jurisdiction over war and peace. For time after time and year after year, administration after administration, Congress after Congress, the Congress has relinquished its responsibility given to us by the Constitution.

The Constitution clearly says that Congress has the power to wage war, and yet, since President Roosevelt declared war against Japan on December 7, 1941, we have had war after war and conflict after conflict, and Congress has not had anything to do with it. Congress has been silent.

This is not a matter of whether a war is a good war or a bad war. This is a matter of the fact that this Congress needs to make that determination.

Article I makes us a coequal branch of government. And, again, for too long, we have had administration after administration, Republican and Democratic, usurp the power that should be the Congress'. So this is the day my colleagues would begin to take it back.

Mr. Chair, I know that my friends on the other side of the aisle have been saying that this is not the best way to do it, but, you know, I have learned through the years that, if you don't take the bull by the horns, it is never the best way to do it.

There is always a reason not to do it. There is always a reason to point out certain things and say, well, this is not a perfect situation. This isn't the perfect situation. I will be the first to say that. But it is perfect in terms of saying we will take back our jurisdiction and do what the American people elected us to do.

Again, I want to thank Mr. Khanna for his tireless work on this issue.

As I mentioned, this measure is an important step in Congress reclaiming its role in foreign policy by debating where and when the United States military is engaged abroad. I don't think that is too much to ask. I think that is what we should be doing.

With the humanitarian crisis in Yemen, it is critical that we act now. We can go after Iran another time--and heaven knows I have been the sponsor of many resolutions and bills sanctioning Iran--but this is not to mix apples with oranges.

There is a civil war going on now in Yemen, and innocent children are dying. We have an ability to put an end to that, and that is what we should do. With this humanitarian crisis, it is critical that we don't delay.

So I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Madam Chair, I yield myself 1 minute. I actually support intelligence sharing. We need to work to reduce civilian casualties and ensure that the United States has a clear picture into the security threats in the region.

However, this amendment is unnecessary. The underlying resolution does not implicate intelligence sharing. I have been very clear about what this resolution would do. We have made necessary changes to this resolution, but I do not support adding unnecessary rules of construction to a resolution which has already passed the Senate.

For that reason, I am opposed to this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition, although I do not oppose the motion.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I accept this resolution, and I agree with everything that Mr. Kustoff just said. Anti-Semitism is a scourge. It is a scourge on humanity; it is a scourge on this country; and it has to be fought just the way prejudice of any kind has to be fought.

I think that this entire House should support this and say, once and for all, with a united voice, we will not tolerate anti-Semitism in any shape or form.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the instructions of the House in the motion to recommit, I report the joint resolution, H.J. Res 37, back to the House with an amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that in the engrossment of H.J. Res. 37, the Clerk be authorized to correct section numbers, punctuation, spelling, and cross-references and to make such other technical and conforming changes as may be necessary to reflect the actions of the House, including the change now at the desk.

Madam Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I today honor the life of one of my constituents, the beloved Esther Salvatore. A lifelong resident of Eastchester, Esther passed away peacefully with family members by her side on January 19, 2019. She will be deeply missed by all who knew and loved her.

Esther's life was devoted to her faith, to raising her children, to loving her many nieces, nephew and cousins, adoring her 6 grandchildren and 7 great-grandchildren, to playing the violin and cherishing her Italian heritage.

The daughter of Antonetta and Crescenzo DiPippo, who came to the United States from Italy, Esther was born on August 13, 1926 in Bronxville and lived in Eastchester her entire life. She grew up with her siblings, Christopher and Gloria, and her many close cousins. Esther attended Waverly Elementary School and graduated from Eastchester High School in 1944. After completing school, she attended New York University to study music.

On September 19, 1948, Esther married Daniel Salvatore of Tuckahoe. She shared 32 years of marriage with her loving husband, and together they raised 3 daughters in Eastchester. A devout Catholic, Esther attended mass regularly at Assumption of Our Lady in Tuckahoe, a place of worship that her father and grandfather helped to build. She was an active parishioner and was a proud member of the Rosary Altar Society, Sodality, the Eastchester/Tuckahoe Senior Center and the Yonkers Philharmonic as a violinist.

Madam Speaker, Esther Salvatore lived a beautiful, rich, and fulfilling life. She enjoyed her family immensely and instilled her faith, a love of music, a strong work ethic and the bond of family across many generations. The example she set will live on through them and the love they shared.

I offer my sincerest condolences to Esther's family and to the entire Eastchester community.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 31) to require certain additional actions in connection with the national emergency with respect to Syria, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 31, the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, as amended, currently under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, this is the third time I have stood on the House floor to argue in favor of passing this bill, to argue that we need to dial up the pressure on the Assad regime; that we need to crack down on his enablers, namely, Iran and Russia; and that we need to push for a political solution that will end the years of horrific bloodshed.

I made that case in November 2016, when the House unanimously passed a version of this bill. I did it again in May of 2017, and again it passed unanimously, only to languish in the other body for the rest of the Congress, stopped by one single Senator.

In Syria, in the last 26 months that have come since the House first passed this bill, the suffering has continued. Over the last few weeks, in the Rukban refugee camp, 13 babies froze to death, and 50,000 more displaced people in this camp are at grave risk. They have nowhere else to go. Unchecked, the Assad regime will likely move in and massacre these innocent people.

I could go on and on, detailing the horrors the Syrian people have endured at the hands of this butcher, Assad. I could describe the atrocities we saw in photographs smuggled out of Syria by Caesar, the government photographer who defected and after whom this bill is named.

But after years of unremitting bloodshed, it is long past time for more talk about Syria. We need action, and my legislation would be an important step in the right direction.

This bill would slap sanctions on anyone who does business with the Assad regime. It would go after anyone who provides financing or parts for aircraft that are used to bomb civilians or works with the energy or construction sectors controlled by the Syrian Government.

We don't want to do accidental harm with this bill, so we have made sure that it would not affect NGOs providing assistance, and we want the administration to use this tool to create leverage, so sanctions could be waived or suspended if meaningful negotiations were moving forward.

In this respect, this bill encourages diplomacy and a peaceful, sustainable solution to the conflict in Syria.

Some people may be resigned to the idea that Assad is simply going to take over the country. I disagree. The United States should not abandon our options for applying pressure to the regime. Syria with Assad at the helm is a recipe for sustained conflict, not sustainable peace. For me, sustainable peace for the people of Syria has always been the goal.

Let me be very clear: This bill would impose Syria-related sanctions; it would not impose nuclear-related sanctions.

I know many of my colleagues are concerned about our withdrawal from the JCPOA. This legislation is entirely consistent with what President Obama promised us after entering into the Iran nuclear deal, that we would continue to sanction Iran for its destabilizing activities in the region. Sanctions under this bill would not prevent a future President of the United States from returning to the Iranian nuclear agreement.

There is obviously no easy solution for the crisis in Syria. It wouldn't have raged on for years and years if there were a simple path out of it. But this bill represents one tool the administration can use to try to move toward that solution, to break the status quo.

I also want to mention the fact that so many wonderful Syrian American groups have been fighting for this legislation, have been fighting against the Assad regime, and have really worked so hard over these past years. It has really been good working with them, although, obviously, very, very difficult.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

House of Representatives,

Committee on Financial Services,

Washington, DC, January 5, 2019.

Hon. Eliot L. Engel,

Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Engel: I am writing concerning H.R. 31, the

``Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2019.''

As a result of your having consulted with the Committee on

Financial Servicing concerning provisions in the bill that

fall within our Rule X jurisdiction, I agree to forgo action

on the bill so that it may proceed expeditiously to the House

floor. The Committee on Financial Services takes this action

with our mutual understanding that, by foregoing

consideration of H.R. 31 at this time, we do not waive any

jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or

similar legislation, and that our Committee will be

appropriately consulted and involved as this or similar

legislation moves forward. Our Committee also reserves the

right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of

conferees to any House-Senate conference involving this or

similar legislation and request your support for any such

request.

Finally, I would appreciate your response to this letter

confirming this understanding with respect to H.R. 31 and

would ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this

matter be included in the Congressional Record.

Sincerely,

Maxine Waters,

Chairwoman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

In closing, let me thank the ranking member, Mr. McCaul, for his very important words.

The world has failed the Syrian people. Nothing can undo the horrors they have had, and they have had to endure them for nearly 8 years. Nothing can bring back those who have been lost. But the world owes it to the living and the dead to try and bring this crisis to an end.

The role America must play is to push for a political solution that allows the Syrian people to choose their own future. That is what American leadership looks like. That is what sets us apart from other great powers on the world stage.

We simply cannot look the other way and allow Assad, Russia, and Iran to steamroll over Syria. That would send a terrible message to our allies. It would undermine security across the entire region, and it would cost so many more innocent lives.

My bill would give the administration greater leverage to raise the cost for Assad and crack down on his lifelines. I ask that all Members support this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 353) to direct the Secretary of State to develop a strategy to regain observer status for Taiwan in the World Health Organization, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 353, a bill to regain observer status for Taiwan in the World Health Organization, currently under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I will start by thanking Mr. Yoho for his work on this bill. It passed the House last Congress with broad bipartisan support, and I look forward to seeing that happen again today.

Mr. Speaker, we all know too well that disease knows no borders, so it is in the interest of the United States to address global health challenges. Without the ability to consistently monitor threats and rapidly coordinate responses globally, health and lives will be at risk, including those of Americans.

A critical organization in this global public health effort is the World Health Organization's World Health Assembly. This is a summit meeting of countries coming together to address global health challenges.

China is actively lobbying against Taiwan's inclusion in these summit meetings, part of its larger effort to squeeze Taiwan out of the international community. Beijing may believe this serves its own narrow interests in asserting control over Taiwan, but it is to the detriment of the effort to fight disease wherever it strikes.

This bill before us today is a step to rectify this situation. H.R. 353 enhances reporting requirements, which will provide Congress better insight into our administration's efforts to obtain Taiwan's observer status in the annual World Health Assembly meetings.

We need to make every effort to ensure that China does not strong-arm and manipulate these international meetings, which are important opportunities to make significant progress on health issues facing the global community. This progress should not be jeopardized by Beijing's political agenda.

I support this measure. We should continue to stand with our partners in Taiwan, and this resolution does just that. I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

We have supported a strong U.S.-Taiwan relationship since we passed the Taiwan Relations Act back in 1979. It is critical that we continue to support our close friend and partner, Taiwan, on the world stage and ensure they maintain a seat at the table when discussing global health challenges.

But China sees it differently, in pursuit of its own narrow political agenda. Beijing is jeopardizing international efforts to improve global health and fight transnational disease outbreaks by redoubling efforts to prevent Taiwan from participating in organizations like the World Health Assembly.

Our response to global health challenges and crises is stronger when more countries are involved in the discussion and prevention. After all, diseases go from border to border and across borders. It is ridiculous to try to keep Taiwan out.

Our response to global health challenges is stronger, again, when more countries are involved in prevention.

There is no reason that the international community should accept a scenario where we allow Beijing to compromise global health as they play the bully with respect to their neighbor. That is another reason why Kosovo should be admitted as well.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 676) to reiterate the support of the Congress of the United States for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 676, reiterating the support of the Congress of the United States for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, currently under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, let me start by thanking the author of this bill, the gentleman from California (Mr. Panetta). I was glad to join him as an original cosponsor, and I am grateful as well to our ranking member, Mr. McCaul, for his strong support of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, for nearly 70 years, the NATO alliance has been the bedrock of transatlantic peace, security, and stability. For seven decades, NATO has been synonymous with Western democracy.

The organization's architects had a tremendous vision, and that vision translated into the most successful political military alliance in history, an alliance that won the Cold War, that brought peace to the Balkans, that fought terrorism in Afghanistan, that today is guarding against Russian aggression in Europe and training forces in Iraq and elsewhere.

Now, Mr. Speaker, we have heard, most notably from the President, that NATO is obsolete, that it is ill-suited to 21st century challenges. That is just plain wrong.

Would we be safer without Article 5, the principle that says an attack on one is an attack on all, an attack on one NATO member is an attack on all NATO members, the commitment that brought our NATO allies to fight at our side after September 11? Would we be better off without 28 other countries that share our values and that know how to fight together effectively? Of course not.

NATO is not a burden, Mr. Speaker. It is a bulwark against aggressive forces that seek to undermine democracy and the rule of law, against strongmen who flout international law and act as though might makes right.

NATO is our greatest strategic advantage, one built over time and at great sacrifice. We simply cannot cede such an advantage. Past and future generations alike would never forgive the squandering of something so precious. We cannot betray our young soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines by sending them into battle alone, without capable allies to share the burden.

So this bill, again, reiterates Congress' commitment to NATO. It would also prohibit any withdrawal from NATO.

I am glad we are considering it so early in this Congress. It sends a clear message to our allies, to our adversaries, and to the administration that this branch of government fully supports the alliance, the collective defense of our allies, and peace across the North Atlantic region.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Panetta), the author of this legislation who has worked very hard on this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly), a very respected member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, let me again, in closing, thank my friend from Texas (Mr. McCaul); Mr. Panetta; our majority leader, Mr. Hoyer; and all of this bill's sponsors.

As this debate has made perfectly clear, there is no partisan disagreement in this body when it comes to the importance of NATO.

Right now, we are dealing with an adversary in Russia that desires nothing more than to see the western alliance splinter. Vladimir Putin's aim is to undermine democracy, to split us apart from our allies, to drive division in the organizations that have kept Russia in check.

The last thing the United States should do is send mixed signals about our commitment, as this President, unfortunately, has done. It plays right into Putin's hands.

From Congress, you will get no such ambiguity. We hope our allies hear that and we hope Putin hears it as well.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support this bill strongly, I urge Members to do the same, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 328) to require the Secretary of State to design and establish a Vulnerability Disclosure Process (VDP) to improve Department of State cybersecurity and a bug bounty program to identify and report vulnerabilities of internet-facing information technology of the Department of State, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 328, the Hack Your State Department Act.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume.

Mr. Speaker, let me start by thanking Representative Lieu, a valued member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for his hard work on this bill and on everything else.

This important legislation passed the House in the last Congress with strong bipartisan support, and I certainly support passing it again.

Mr. Speaker, it is critical that we modernize our government to better deal with 21st century challenges. The State Department is under the constant threat of cyberattack from foreign actors bent on stealing our secrets, disrupting our foreign policy, and undermining our security.

Mr. Lieu's bill will help shore up the State Department against this sort of intrusion.

First, it requires the Secretary of State to get out ahead of this problem. Instead of waiting for the next attack to happen, this bill would mandate a plan for researchers to actively seek out and report vulnerabilities.

Secondly, this bill launches a new initiative, the so-called ``bug bounty program.'' This seeks to tap the expertise of everyday Americans by rewarding citizens who uncover and report security risks in the Department's computer system. It will allow security researchers and friendly hackers to find the cracks in the system so that the Department can patch them.

This effort is modeled after a successful program at the Defense Department, which got off the ground in 2016. Since then, 1,400 people have registered to participate, and they have found roughly 140 vulnerabilities.

Our Federal agencies should learn from one another. It is just common sense to put this tested practice to work at the State Department and elsewhere.

Mr. Speaker, I am very glad to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Ted Lieu), the author of this bill and a very honored member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I again want to thank Mr. Lieu for this important piece of legislation.

It seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that we have been caught flat-footed before a range of new threats, including cyberattacks. Our agencies haven't done enough to root out vulnerabilities, and, frankly, Congress hasn't done enough to make sure that our government agencies have the tools they need to tackle these challenges.

As we head into the 116th Congress, I will be leading the Foreign Affairs Committee in focusing on this. We will be taking a comprehensive look at cyber threats to make sure the State Department and all our departments and agencies are properly equipped to handle this challenge. For now, this bill is an important step in the right direction.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support the measure before us, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 30) disapproving the President's proposal to take an action relating to the application of certain sanctions with respect to the Russian Federation.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5

legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.J. Res. 30, disapproving the President's proposal on certain sanctions on the Russian Federation, under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, it is regrettable that we are in this situation. It is the result of the Trump administration, again, trying to make an end run around Congress on an issue as important as Russia sanctions.

On December 19 of last year, the Treasury Department notified Congress of its intention to relax sanctions against three corporations tied to Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch and close associate of Vladimir Putin. The Trump administration may have a perfectly legitimate reason for easing those sanctions. But the reason we are on the floor today is that we just don't know. And, under the law, we have very little time left to get the answers we need.

The sanctions we are dealing with today were imposed under CAATSA-- the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act--the bill we passed 1\1/2\ years ago to, among other things, slap sanctions on Vladimir Putin's cronies.

The law is written so that Congress would be able to step in if we thought any administration could be making a mistake in waiving or easing sanctions. The Republican majority at the time wrote strict and complex provisions for exercising that oversight, allowing only 30 days to pass a measure that could reverse such a decision.

Again: the Trump administration announced its plans to ease these sanctions on December 19, 30 days ago, in the middle of the holidays, just before the President shut the government down, at the end of the last Congress, and before committees in this Congress have had a chance to organize and look into this very serious issue. This timing leads me to believe that the administration was trying to jam this decision through so Congress would not be able to act.

We ask the administration to explain this decision. Their answers were, frankly, inadequate. We asked the administration to pump the brakes on easing these sanctions so we could review the decision further. They simply wouldn't.

So, with that 30-day window closing, we are now forced to bring this measure to the floor to try to block the decision. It is too bad, really. I would rather the administration respected Congress enough to allow us the time to address our concerns. And, again, the rules for this were put into effect by the Republican majority in the last Congress, and they are good rules. I would rather they hadn't dropped this announcement when they did--that is the White House--so that our committees could hold hearings and do our work the way we want to.

But with the threat that Russia poses to the United States, to our friends and allies, to democracy around the world, Congress cannot just look the other way when the administration rushes a decision like this. There are too many open questions about whether Deripaska will still control the companies that these sanctions address.

So, we need to move this resolution of disapproval before the clock runs out, and I ask all Members on both sides of the aisle to support it today.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly), who is a valued member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal), the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee and my classmate in Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the chairman of the important Intelligence Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from California.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) the chair of the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time I have remaining.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett) an additional 15 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Himes).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), who is our majority leader and the author of this joint resolution.

Mr. Speaker, might I inquire of the gentleman from Texas if he is prepared to close.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remainder of my time to close.

Mr. Speaker, let me first say to Mr. McCaul that I am very happy to hear those words come out of his mouth. As you know, we have had a tradition of bipartisanship on the Foreign Affairs Committee with Chairman Royce and myself, and now with me as chairman and Mr. McCaul. So I want to thank the gentleman from Texas for speaking out forcefully and saying the right thing.

That is why Congress overwhelmingly passed sanctions on Russia in 2017, because Members of both parties understand the threat that Russia and Putin pose. From the illegal annexation of Crimea to the war in eastern Ukraine to the support to Bashar al Assad to the attack on our own democracy in 2016, Russia is clearly a major adversary that needs to be dealt with strongly.

So when we see the administration--and I would say this about any administration, Democrat or Republican--when the administration appears to go easy on one of Putin's closest pals, we understandably have serious questions. We need to see the whole picture, and right now we are not.

Congress cannot be left out of decisions this important. That is something I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle understand, and I hope we can send the administration a strong bipartisan message to that effect. This resolution represents Congress doing our job, exercising oversight and using checks and balances provided in the Constitution.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.